From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Nov 28 06:45:38 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 28 Nov 2005 06:45:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1EgkG9-0006CA-WF for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 06:45:38 -0800 Received: from zproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.162.193]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1EgkG6-0006C3-Ur for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 06:45:37 -0800 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id l8so751424nzf for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 06:45:33 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=m9yJnytU9Tt+CGLk7Gi1zh0LYCStxZAaUNXCp78392nJr8M/i+q4AeXWfWtQOup92uMi9H2joXr7Z3HtITxi3jAW2qXxv9LOd08FEhYZtSwEeweXC74ZJcAIT3qzALBT6in2jzNc8HDTljH85+ylNcGVz4cvwsPIR7s25ZAMyuc= Received: by 10.64.199.1 with SMTP id w1mr1608869qbf; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 06:45:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.72.15 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 06:45:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <2d3df92a0511280645i24310fd2ga93e5b9be94cc067@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:45:32 +0100 From: HeliodoR To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: questions about questions In-Reply-To: <26506d300511280238g762086b4o@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_52345_9839007.1133189132721" References: <26506d300511280238g762086b4o@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.2 (--) X-archive-position: 2708 X-Approved-By: exitconsole@gmail.com X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: exitconsole@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners ------=_Part_52345_9839007.1133189132721 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline > > .i mi puzi tcidu le vomo'o .e le mumo'o pe la lyfybys. > > I have recently read the fourth-section and fifth-section of the LFB Have You read the fourth section of something totally unknown and the fifth section of LfB? If not, You will need {.i mi puzi tcidu lo vomo'o jo'u lo mumo'o pe lyfyby.} instead. .ije mi terpreti di'e > > and I ask the following: I think You mean {.i ji'a} "and." {je} is for logical connection, but here it is not important that You're really doing both (reading and asking). .i xu la'edi'e mintu soi vo'a vo'e > > is-true? the referrentofthefollowing is the same and vice-versa? There's no value given to {vo'e}. :) Actually, {soi vo'a vo'e} is not exactly "vice versa" in every case. In the next few sections it will become clear that VOhA cmavo refer back to sumti of the current sentence. Maybe You should say {.i xu la'edi'e mintu la'ede'e} "is the referent of the following utterance the same as that of a remote utterance?" .i le tcika du li xo > > the time =3D ? Almost perfect, only it isn't {li xo} what You need, but {xo}: {.i le tcika du xo} Although grammatical correctness doesn't always guarantee the efficiency of communication. o_O By this sentence the listener(s) cannot know if You're talking about the current time, the time when You will go out for a walk or the time that Your friend bought a dog. Therefore {.i lo ca tcika du xo} is more geek-proof. .ija ma tcika ti > > what time this? {ma tcika ti} is a correct, but kind of clumsy way to do it. {ti} signs something You can show, or You can point to. In this case You're pointing to an *event*, doing what most "pro" people would claim wrong. The standard question is {.i ma ca tcika}. Hope I could help, mi'e darves. ------=_Part_52345_9839007.1133189132721 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
.i mi puzi tcidu le vomo'o .e le= mumo'o pe la lyfybys.

I have recently read the fourth-section and f= ifth-section  of the LFB
 
Have You read the fourth section of something totally unknown
and the fifth section of LfB? If not, You will need
{.i mi puzi tcidu lo vomo'o jo'u lo mumo'o pe lyfyby.} instead.
<= br>
.ije mi terpreti di'e

and= I ask the following:
 
I think You mean {.i ji'a} "and."
{je} is for logical connection, but here it is not important
that You're really doing both (reading and asking).

.i xu la'edi'e mintu soi vo'a vo= 'e

is-true? the referrentofthefollowing is the same and vice-versa?
 
There's no value given to {vo'e}. :)
Actually, {soi vo'a vo'e} is not exactly "vice versa" i= n every
case. In the next few sections it will become clear that VOhA
cmavo refer back to sumti of the current sentence.
Maybe You should say
{.i xu la'edi'e mintu la'ede'e}
"is the referent of the following utterance the same as that of
a remote utterance?"

.i le tcika du li xo

the = time =3D ?
 
Almost perfect, only it isn't {li xo} what You need,
but {xo}:
{.i le tcika du xo}
Although grammatical correctness doesn't always
guarantee the efficiency of communication. o_O
By this sentence the listener(s) cannot know if
You're talking about the current time, the time
when You will go out for a walk or the time that
Your friend bought a dog. Therefore
{.i lo ca tcika du xo} is more geek-proof.

.ija ma tcika ti

what tim= e this?
 
{ma tcika ti} is a correct, but kind of clumsy way
to do it. {ti} signs something You can show, or
You can point to. In this case You're pointing to
an *event*, doing what most "pro" people would
claim wrong.
The standard question is {.i ma ca tcika}.
 
Hope I could help,
mi'e darves.
------=_Part_52345_9839007.1133189132721--